What are the personal and professional characteristics that distinguish the researchers who publish in high- and low-impact journals? A multi-national web-based survey

Abstract

PurposeThis study identifies the personal and professional profiles of researchers with a greater potential to publish high-impact academic articles.MethodThe study involved conducting an international survey of journal authors using a web-based questionnaire. The survey examined personal characteristics, funding, and the perceived barriers of research quality, work-life balance, and satisfaction and motivation in relation to career. The processes of manuscript writing and journal publication were measured using an online questionnaire that was developed for this study. The responses were compared between the two groups of researchers using logistic regression models.ResultsA total of 269 questionnaires were analysed. The researchers shared some common perceptions; both groups reported that they were seeking recognition (or to be leaders in their areas) rather than financial remuneration. Furthermore, both groups identified time and funding constraints as the main obstacles to their scientific activities. The amount of time that was spent on research activities, having >5 graduate students under supervision, never using text editing services prior to the publication of articles, and living in a developed and English-speaking country were the independent variables that were associated with their article getting a greater chance of publishing in a high-impact journal. In contrast, using one’s own resources to perform studies decreased the chance of publishing in high-impact journals.ConclusionsThe researchers who publish in high-impact journals have distinct profiles compared with the researchers who publish in low-impact journals. English language abilities and the actual amount of time that is dedicated to research and scientific writing, as well as aspects that relate to the availability of financial resources are the factors that are associated with a successful researcher’s profile.

The Impact of Non-Brazilian Contribution on the Publishing Performance of Psychology Journals in Brazil

“…Within international collaboration, our findings yielded mixed results. Inconsistent with Hypothesis 4, as well as recent research ( Paiva et al, 2017 ), is the finding that there is not a lower prevalence of Ibero-American collaboration among the internationally published journals in our sample. In hindsight, this might be expected, as the language of Brazil is most compatible with dialects from Ibero-American countries.…”

“…This brings us back to the notion of lost science. With the higher impact factor journals publishing in English, the acceptance rate for non-native English speaking scholars is much lower than for their lingua franca counterparts ( Vasconcelos et al, 2007 ; Paiva et al, 2017 ). Likewise, the publishing performance for emerging nation journals is much lower than for their lingua franca counterparts ( Tijssen et al, 2006 ; Packer, 2014 ; Fradkin, 2015 , 2017b ).…”

Predatory journals and researcher needs

“…This influence is clearly articulated in the Nature commentary, ‘The pressure to publish pushes down quality’ (Sarewitz, ). Whilst in several countries there are high rewards for being published in high impact journals, there is often a general pressure to publish (anywhere) and a lack of fluent English language precludes many researchers from being accepted in western journals (see Paiva et al ., ).…”

Who's Contributing Most to American Neuroscience Journals: American or Foreign Authors?

“…The national origin of the institution may impact the publication and citation rates if the authors are from nondeveloped and non-English-speaking countries because there are barriers to access to advanced technology and language proficiency. [15][16][17] We found that from non-American countries, European followed by Asian institutions had the most articles in the American neurology and neuroradiology literature. In American neurosurgery journals, articles from Asia had an equal or greater number of contributions compared with European institutions.…”